27. Memorandum submitted by Plan UK
INTRODUCTION
1. Plan is an international child centred
development organisation committed to promoting the rights of
children worldwide. We operate from our head office in UK in 62
countries across the world, including 46 countries in Africa,
Asia and Latin America. Plan UK welcomes the opportunity to give
evidence to the International Development Select Committee.
2. In answering the questions posed by the
Committee, Plan has a number of recommendations about how and
why humanitarian response to natural disasters could and should
be improved. These are described in more detail below, but cover:
(a) Linkages between humanitarian action
and longer-term development work;
(b) The role of children in humanitarian
action, particularly the need to recognise and build on their
innate common sense and their capacities, and to ensure the protection
of their rights and dignity;
(c) The need to reduce vulnerability of the
poor to disasters;
(d) The increasing impact of climate change
on humanitarian need;
(e) The importance of providing a robust
protection framework, including the needs of internally displaced
people and an examination of the complexities of working with
the military; and
(f) The need for DFID to further advocate
for greater coordination among humanitarian actors.
3. The impact of humanitarian intervention
can fundamentally undermine long-term development, so it is vital
that this does not happen. Plan develops long-lasting programmes
in communities and is often the first agency to respond in the
many low profile disasters that affect communities through its
commitment to local and children's involvement in programmes.
Plan has also coordinated effective responses to recent high profiler
disaster, the South Asian Tsunami and the Kashmir earthquake.
As a highly experienced development agency that responds to emergency
situations worldwide, Plan is particularly concerned about the
interactions between short-term relief and longer-term development.
This experience has enabled us to analyse and develop a new approach
to disasters programming.
4. The International Development Select
Committee has itself acknowledged that "Prospects for development
are inextricably linked to the prospects for children in developing
countriestheir health, their education, their sense of
social involvement."[53]
Plan UK believes that this principle should apply both in emergencies
and in long-term development. In our experience, children and
young people have a vital role to play in preparing for and responding
to disasters.
5. Plan commends both DFID's new Humanitarian
Policy and its Disaster Risk Reduction policy.[54]
We are especially pleased that DFID has emphasised Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRR) as a core part of its humanitarian strategy, and
that DFID has made a commitment to a target of spending 10% of
all humanitarian funds on DRR. We agree that the identification
of social protection and safety nets as a key tool for reaching
the most vulnerable in chronic emergencies, and particularly as
a potential alternative to food aid are important priorities,
as is the prioritisation of quality, needs-based humanitarian
action based on well-informed needs assessments and the focus
on forgotten emergencies.
6. Plan wishes to note from the outset that
arguably, there are no natural disasters. There are natural hazards
and man-made hazards and there are vulnerable populations; brought
together they lead to emergencies requiring humanitarian responses.
Our reason for suggesting that emergencies and disasters are man-made
is partly tactical and partly semantic. If not man-made, disasters
are deemed natural, and that then confuses the way disasters are
responded to. The IDC is encouraged to adopt the standard UN definitions
of disasters.[55]
55
VULNERABILITY AND
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
7. Poverty and vulnerability are intertwined
and mutually reinforcing. Children, because they are still developing
and are dependant on adults for their survival are especially
vulnerable. Poverty impacts upon the children in a household the
greatest and children are most affected by shocks like disasters.
Poverty reduction needs to start from an analysis of vulnerability
and risk. Responses such as comprehensive social protection strategiesa
package of social insurance, free education and health care, and
income generationshould be an important part of both donor
and national government policy not only to protect the most vulnerable,
in particular children, from destitution but to provide a means
of raising themselves out of poverty.[56]
8. Despite their vulnerability, children
are almost invisible in emergency planning. This issue goes to
the heart of the Committee's questions "How do donors ensure
that humanitarian assistance is delivered equitably" (in
terms of gender, ethnicity, age, caste and so on), and "What
can be done to ensure that humanitarian assistance is pro-poor
and does not exacerbate inequalities?" While all members
of society suffer from the impact of emergencies, it is accepted
that children are among the most vulnerable groups. Plan's experiences
in Asia have shown that children often form more than one third
of the death toll from disaster.[57]
The protection of children's rights is at the heart of Plan's
work, and these rights are shattered in emergency situations:
for example, children in temporary shelters are vulnerable to
abuse, exploitation and trafficking. In Pakistan since the October
2005 earthquake, Plan has worked with a number of other INGOs
to advocate for not placing vulnerable children in institutions
or orphanages. The fact that elements of the international community
still implement such policies illustrates the need for greater
understanding of protecting the rights of children in emergencies.
9. Plan's post-tsunami research has analysed
the impact of the disaster and subsequent relief effort on children's
rights,[58]
and found that in many cases there has been little improvement
even 12 months afterwards. The impact of disasters on children
in terms of mental trauma, physical distress and increased poverty
is long-term, and can continue to impact on them into their adult
lives. Consultation with children in Thailand, India, Indonesia
and Sri Lanka found again and again that on top of the immense
trauma created by the tsunami, children felt disempowered and
ignored by the response that followed. One child in Tamil Nadu
said: "Children are not satisfied by the manner in which
aid was distributed, as many that were rich benefited but the
poor suffered."
10. This research followed Plan's earlier
calls for the rights of children to be respected in the aftermath
of disasters.[59]
A fundamental cause of this is a failure of those responding to
disasters to enable children to participate in the design and
operation of programmes, a right enshrined in the Convention on
the Rights of the Child. There is a need for a culture change
among the international relief community, recognising that participation
in such circumstances is not an additional burden, but provides
a solid foundation for effective programmes. Clearly there is
a need to balance participation with the need to act quickly and
effectively. However, given what we know about the relatively
small impact of international aid in comparison to locally-led
efforts, the international community needs to recognise that treating
"local ownership" and "participation" as founding
principles rather than jargon to pay lip service to could transform
the impact of humanitarian aid. Plan has positive and extensive
experiences of local participation in emergency responses, including
a highly participatory relief programme in El Salvadorfunded
by DFIDin the aftermath of Hurricane Stan in October 2005.[60]
11. The capacity of children is great and
often underestimated, both before and after disasters. Plan's
research has shown that children as young as nine were involved
in supporting their families and relatives throughout the post-tsunami
period, helping to clean away debris, cook food, support other
vulnerable groups such as older people, give first aid, and identify
and trace separated families, among other activities[61]
Children are also highly sensitive to inequalities in aid provision,
potentially enabling better management of disaster responses.
This capacity can be drawn upon not only after disasters, but
beforehand as well.
12. In Plan's experience, children have
a significant role to play in disaster preparedness and risk reduction.
They have the capacity and the will to be involved, and can be
easily reached and organised through school networks.[62]
Plan's disaster preparedness work in El Salvador has centred around
the training of youth disaster preparedness committees, an approach
that has been highly successful. After Hurricane Stan, these groups
of young people were able to provide leadership and guidance to
their communities, organising evacuations and camps, gathering
information and identifying and supporting the most vulnerable.
The process has been immensely empowering, with communities now
placing great faith and trust in the capacities of these young
people.
DEVELOPMENT AND
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE
13. The potentially negative impact of relief
and humanitarian assistance on development processes and indigenous
capacity, both at the community and the national level, is widely
understood. Plan recognises that much of the discussion around
"sustainable development" has failed to significantly
alter the nature of humanitarian action on the ground. This responds
directly to the question "To what extent do humanitarian
responses to natural disasters undermine or enhance resilience
and the ability of people to cope with future disasters? "
Our 70 years experience of community development confirms that
sustainable humanitarianism and a developmental approach to humanitarian
efforts is a valid and viable strategy. Sustainable humanitarianism
supports rather than undermines the aims of long-term development.
Unfortunately, there are numerous examples of how the impact of
humanitarian intervention can fundamentally undermine long-term
development. If poorly delivered, humanitarian assistance can
create greater need through exacerbating conflict, for example.
Traditional humanitarian action still tends to be predicated on
one-way transfer of goods and power, and can be a real threat
to local and national governance systems. Clear and simple best
practices for minimising these unintended impacts still prove
elusive, and DFID should be commended for the work they have done
in supporting the identification of such practices.
14. Plan's recent DFID-funded programme
in Guatemalaafter the floods and landslides caused by Hurricane
Stan in 2005clearly demonstrates the benefits of taking
developmental approaches to relief. Plan placed the municipal
authorities at the centre of our response from the outset, supporting
them to gather information, coordinate with the national government,
distribute relief supplies and plan rehabilitation programmes.
The proof of the effectiveness of this approach could be seen
in the reaction of a community when Plan attempted to circumvent
the consultation systems we had established in order to respond
rapidly to an urgently identified need for sleeping materials.
Rather than welcoming the support, members of the community were
angry that they had not been fully consulted. Enabling communities
to have a keener sense of their rights in this way can have immense
long-term impact.
15. In Plan's experience, it is local efforts
that have the biggest impact in providing relief, particularly
in the initial stages. Initial coordination efforts by international
agencies should note this and be sure not to undermine or replace
local efforts. In response to the Pakistan earthquake, the UN
system established structures in parallel to existing authority
structures and undermined their role. After the South East Asia
tsunami, the rush by international agencies to coordinate their
work, marginalised local action with local people's voices not
heard in coordination meetings.[63]
16. It is important that DFID establishes
comprehensive ways of measuring the impact of its humanitarian
work in the context of its overall goal of poverty reduction and
achieving the MDGs. This responds directly to the Committee's
question "How effectively do DFID and other development actors
analyse the risks to their development programmes posed by natural
disasters?" Plan believes that DFID should articulate more
clearly how they plan to manage the acknowledged risk that poorly
planned assistance, including humanitarian aid, can undermine
the formation of effective states. A substantial body of research
shows that aid can replace or undermine local governance structures,
particularly in fragile states that so often suffer from chronic
emergencies. This is also especially important in relation to
DFID's increased commitment to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and
social protection. As DFID's new DRR Policy clearly states, disasters
should be a "core development concern".[64]
With DFID committing greatly increased funds to DRR work, it
is more vital than ever that the impact of this work is closely
measured and monitored. Plan would also be particularly interested
to see more details of DFID's approach to social protection, including
the role of social welfare as a long-term alternative to food
aid. Plan's work has shown the value of comprehensive social protection
programmes encompassing a whole range of activities aimed at arresting
the cycle of vulnerability to shocks and disasters.[65]
17. There is evidence that climate related
disasters are increasing in intensity and impact, yet climate
change is not given sufficient or coherently joined-up attention
across the UK Government. This concern responds to the question
"In what planning is DFID engaging to take account of
the key threats to their humanitarian programmes, including HIV/AIDS,
avian flu and the extreme climatic events which are likely to
occur with greater frequency as a result of climate change?
" Plan calls for a clearer articulation from DFID on how
it will work with other parts of the UK Government to ensure policy
coherence against the increasing threat that climate change brings.
Given the amount of money that DFIDCHASE will spend on
communities suffering from the effects of climate change, DFID's
humanitarian efforts should clearly identify the UK's role in
mitigation work.
INITIAL DISASTER
RESPONSE AND
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN
SYSTEM
18. The structures of the current international
humanitarian system leaves significant room for improvement concerning
IDPs. Plan's work in countries such as Colombia, Guinea and Pakistan
has given us first-hand experience of providing assistance and
protection offered to IDPs. IDPs form an enormous group of people,
many of them children, whose needs and rights are not fully understood.
Since responsibility for IDPs falls between the mandates of several
UN agencies, we are convinced that the institutional structures
of the current international humanitarian system leaves significant
room for improvement.
19. Concerning the role of the military,
any loss of "real or perceived neutrality" can lead
to security threats and potential targeting for humanitarian actors.
There is a strong emphasis on the role of the military in providing
humanitarian assistance in DFID's Humanitarian Policy. Plan UK
supports this position, having worked closely with the military
in responding to both the Tsunami and the South Asia earthquake,
and seeing first hand the value that they can add.
20. Plan UK applauds DFID's efforts to support
initiatives such as the Good Humanitarian Donorship. However we
believe that coordination between and among donors and all humanitarian
actors is "work in progress"; there should be no let
up in efforts to improve coordination before during and after
emergencies.
RECOMMENDATIONS
21. Plan UK urges the International Development
Select Committee to call on DFID to:
develop rigorous approaches to ensure
that children's capacity is utilised and their voices heard in
humanitarian responses. Minimum standards around children's rights
should be a part of the Sphere standards;
work with organisations like Plan
to ensure that the Sphere standards become an accountability tool
for communities to be able to claim their rights from external
actors, rather than a checklist for INGOs;
encourage learning among the military
and civilian actors engaged in humanitarianism;
clearly acknowledge that the loss
of "real or perceived neutrality" can lead to security
threats and potential targeting of humanitarian actors and recognise
the challenges of humanitarian actors maintaining their neutrality
if they are increasingly part of the planning of military operations;
re-emphasise the need for greater
coordination among donors, particularly between EU and non-EU
donors; and
prioritise coordinated efforts to
monitor the quality of humanitarian responses in future. The achievements
of the Tsunami Evaluation Committee should not be a unique exercise,
but seen as the way forward for accountability.
May 2006
53 HIV/AIDS: The Impact of Social and Economic Development,
International Development Select Committee Report, 2001. Back
54
Plan UK works with a number of leading international development
and humanitarian agencies-Action Aid, Christian Aid, Tearfund,
Red Cross and Practical Action-which have all received funding
from DFID to develop and implement disaster risk reduction programmes. Back
55
See: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng%20home.htm Back
56
Ending Child Poverty and Securing Child Rights: The Role of
Social Protection, Plan UK, October 2004. Back
57
Little Green Disaster Book, Plan International, April 2005. Back
58
Children and the Tsunami, Plan International, December
2005. Back
59
After the Cameras Have Gone, Plan International, October
2005. Back
60
The affected communities (and particularly children) identified
priorities and managed relief funds. Back
61
Children and the Tsunami, Plan International, December
2005. Back
62
After the Cameras Have Gone, Plan International, October
2005. Back
63
Children and the Tsunami. Back
64
Disaster Risk Reduction: A Development Concern, DFID, January
2005. Back
65
Ending Child Poverty & Securing Child Rights: The Role
of Social Protection, Plan UK, October 2005. Back
|